jerry: i'm going to vote on saturday. i support rubio. to start with, i have a side from a neighborhood grocery store for donald trump. that is the really sign that is daily sinai to get. i put in my yard. since i been listening to him on and all of his stupid stuff that he is staying, calling him orliars i don't want someone like that representing me. this is a great country. if we don't get the right person up there we are going to go down worse than we are right now.

made the biggest mess of this country i have ever seen in my life. i am 70 years old. i have been through a whole lot of my life. ,his is the worst eight years seven years that i've seen. we don't get somebody in there they can bring this country back up and not somebody like donald trump with all his millions of dollars that thinks he can do whatever he wants to do because he is rich that doesn't work for me. steve: some new bloomberg politics numbers. looking at south carolina. donald trump still leading in that state according to bloomberg. ted cruz in second place at 17%.

susan cole and he says i should call him by his nickname which is smoked. you have had a big commitment. you watch every single debate. e: the debates are kind of embarrassing. this fellow here rubio is young and down to earth and he will surround himself with some very good people. i think he will do well. the candidates who are doing the best in the polls are thriving on anger. that is not what people are

interested in. we are smarter than they think we are. using all these very wonderful this and fantastic back, that is not going to help this country. you've got to have some real plans. i think rubio has that ability to find people to stand with him and do that. as an example, he has our governor who is great on business issues. there was a fellow up their minute ago on the military, steve siegfried. he surrounded himself with people who know what they're doing. that is not what we have right now in washington. it could be the ticket up there on stage. it would be very wise to have our governor nikki haley is the vice president. the top issues are the social issues. the economy. look what governor nikki haley has done for our state. plans andl kinds of

manufacturers coming in here. military. all kinds of issues. it is because of taxes that business has come into trouble. this is a right to work state. ask our governor. she doesn't want labor unions in here. we don't want to labor unions in here. manufacturers are going to come here if the labor unions are too strong. the quiz happened up north. the steel mills of shutdown. people know what they're doing. rubio needs to stay out of the whole rod that trump is doing,

let trump do all the anger. stay focused on the issues. stay out of all the socialization. i think there will be a big turnout on saturday. a big turnout here in treatment. chapin has a couple of thousand people of the surrounding areas have more. i have lived here 24 years. thank you. joe: good evening said. ir. i am undecided as yet. i was very encouraged by a lot of the republican candidates this year. the thing that i would emphasize is that my demographic of being a two euros mail. i own a business right behind where rubio was speaking.

an auto repair shop. i want to encourage everybody my community to go out and vote. we have some very good candidates. we have to take our country back. it is not right with people who've worked all their lives and they have enough of this they have nothing to show for it. steve: endorsements of nikki haley has gone to marco rubio. jamie: i just don't care for the bush family. they have everybody trying to run for his brother. forgottenople she what pushed into the economy. he crashed the economy.

when he was in office. trump is one of the best ones because at least he speaks the truth and he speaks out about how other people feel about this country. money, he has his his own money to run. he has created jobs. he wants good american things. our foreign trade agreements are terrible. the trade policy is a disaster. free,et everything for they get lower taxes and tax cuts and they get all kinds of things. i like trump's ideas because he doesn't want his foreigners coming over here. they should earn their way into america.

steve: we will have live coverage of the victory and concession speeches on saturday. we also expect to hear from hillary clinton and bernie sanders in nevada. edward from connecticut: good evening. thank you for the program that you are putting on. america that corporate america. we are the public. not the republic. the power belongs to the people. when we put in place a voting system where we can go and vote on issues. the direction that our nation is going in. that is what we can clean this mess up.

and turn washington right side up. we pay for those issues that they put on the floor of our house with our tax dollars and blood. going to war. killing other people >> coming up, senator ted cruz holds a news conference. then we join donald trump as he campaigns in south carolina. after that, senator marco rubio is is endorsed by south carolina governor hailey.

"washington journal" live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on -span. >> during campaign 2016 c-span takes you on the road to the white house as we follow the candidates on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. >> senator ted cruz spoke at a news conference to address his going legal feud with fellow

republican presidential candidate donald trump. >> mr. trump's lawyers contend that that advertisement you just saw is an attempt to materially mislead the public. and indeed he provides a little more detail. he says that this attack ad, is what he calls it, is "not only completely disingenuous, but replete with lies, false defam tri and destructive statements, and downright fabications. mr. trump's lawyer's letter goes on to say the ad "blatantly misrepresents to the public that mr. trump is pro

choice, and nothing could be further from the truth. and the letter concludes, by threatening that if we will not pull down the ad, that mr. trump will seek immediate legal action to prevent the continued broadcast of this ad. and to hold me jointly and severally libel to the fullest eesm tent of the law for any damages resulting there from. i have to say to mr. trump, you have been threatening frivolous lawsuits for your entire adult life. even in the anls of frivolous lawsuits this takes the cake. so donald, i would encourage you, if you want to file a lawsuit challenging this ad claiming it is defamation, file the lawsuit.

it is a remarkable contention that an ad that plays video of donald trump speaking on national television is somehow defamation. the operatives words in that ad come from donald trump's own mouth. and i understand if a candidate has a record like donald trump's, how he could consider anyone pointing to his actual record being defamation. but if donald trump files the lawsuit that he threatens in this letter, that lawsuit will be forgive luss and it will result in both donald trump and any lawyer that signs his name to the pleadings being sanctioned in court for filing frivolous litigation. but before the lawsuit ends in sanctions for mr. trump, it

will be important to try the merits of the case. now, any first-year law student can tell you, in a defamation case truth is an absolute defense. which means the substance of the case will be whether or not donald trump has in fact been pro choice. now, i would note actually in the ad we don't say donald is pro choice. we simply play video of him saying he is very pro choice and he is pro choice in every respect. but if mr. trump follows through on his threat to file a defamation lawsuit, there are at least four data points that will be relevant in lit gating this lawsuit. number one, the tim russert interview. his own words sate on national television are a matter of

public record and by definition repeating someone's own words cannot be defamation. and, once again, what he said on national television is that he is very pro choice, he would not ban partial birth abortion, and he is pro choice in every respect. a second data point that would surely be relevant is mr. trump's statement in august of 2015 that he believes his sister would make a "phenomenal supreme court justice. " now, who is his sister? his sistser a court of appeals judge appointed by bill clinton. his sister has an extreme left wing position. his sister as an appellate judge struck down the new jersey law banning partial

birth abortion. now, remind you, new jersey is not a bright red state. new jersey is a blue state. and yet donald's sister concluded it was irrational to ban partial birth abortion. that is a fringe legal opinion. that is an opinion on the stream left of the radical pro hoice world. and donald trump not ten years ago, not 20 years ago, but in august of 2015 said he thought his sister would make a "phenomenal supreme court justice." well, i suspect there are a lot of pro choice democrats who might disagree. a third data point in any itigation -- where i would remind you, mr. trump's lawyer said the ad blatantly misrepresents to the public

that mr. trump is pro choice. nothing could be further from the truth. " the third data point on whether it is true or not that donald trump has been pro choice for the first 60 years of his life are his contributions to democrats. now, donald's political contribution history is truly remarkable. this is a republican presidential candidate who has given money to jimmy carter, to joe biden, to hillary clinton, to tom daschle, to ted kennedy, , to chuck schumer to charlie rangel to anthony weiner to john kerry. you're seeing a panoply of pro abortion democrats. that donald has supported not just once but for decades.

devoting his own money to helping elect and reelect those candidates. now, for anyone in south carolina who cares about conservative supreme court justices, we know as a fact that donald trump does not care about conservative supreme court justices. why do we know that? because nobody who compared about conservative supreme court justices would make contributions to these democrats. that is fundamentally incompatible. you cannot be funding the democrats that are fighting for liberal judicial activists on the court and claim that you actually care about having conservative supreme court justices. so the people of south carolina should know. if donald trump ever became resident we would see justices consistent with his lifelong

pattern of who he supported. consistent with his statement his sister would make a phenomenal supreme court justice. and indeed, i would note the daily caller reported that between 1989 and 2010, donald ave $314,300 to democratic groups and canned dathes. even in donald's world that's not chump change. and if you look at the 2006 election cycle, 2006 election cycle is when the democrats took over congress, donald and his son together donated $77,200 to the democrats versus only $24,250 to the republicans. remember, donald's explanation is he's a businessman he's got to buy influence. he was putting his money

overwhelmingly on the democrat side of the ledger. in fact a large share of trump's donations to democrats were given to congressional committees dedicated specifically to gaining majority control of congress. now, that's not buying access, that's not being a businessman and playing the game. that is helping fund the democratic takeover of congress. so the people of south carolina think it was a good thing that harry reid and nancy pelosi became majority leader and speaker of the house. then you can thank donald trump for helping fund the political effort to make that happen. i would note that if donald had been unsuccessful in helping democrats get majorities in both houses of congress, we would never have obama care. donald trump is a direct cause of obamacare passing.

because if either house had remained in republican control, obamacare never would have pass, and donald helped fund the democratic takeover of both houses of congress. nobody who cares about conservative judges would help fund turning the senate over to the democrats putting harry reid in charge. and a fourth piece of evidence that would be very relevant in any defamation action that mr. trump might file is his comments not a year arkse not five years ago, not ten years ago or 20 years ago. his comment four days ago on the debate stage where mr. trump said that planned parenthood "does do wonderful things" planned parenthood is the nation's largest abortion

provider. they are responsible for the deaths over the years of millions of unborn children. being pro life and supporting planned parenthood are fundamentally incompatible. nobody who is in fact pro life would utter the words planned parenthood does do wonderful things. so i look forward to any lawsuit. and let me note, by the way, one of the things i look forward to most of all, is deposing donald trump. for that particular endeavor, i may well not use outside counsel. i may take the deposition myself. and i will say this. whether in a deposition or a court of law, getting donald trump under oath under penalty of perjury answering these questions, i will point out it

didn't work out very well for bill clinton. donald trump does not want to be under oath answering questions about his own record because his position quite simply is that anyone who points to his record is somehow lying. this threatened lawsuit is the very definition of frivolous. now, donald has had a long career of using great wealth and power trying to bully others and threatening frivolous others has been one tool he's used. the bullying is not going to work here. will note in addition that both donald trump and marco rubio have followed parallel strategies in this campaign. built on two elements. number one, whenever anyone points to their actual record

the response of both donald trump and marco rubio is to yell the word liar. whenever anyone does, as this ad does, plays the actual words of donald trump on national television, his response is to yell liar. whenever anyone does as i did at the debate this saturday point out that donald still supports funding of planned parenthood, his response is to bello from the stage, liar. and when he continues and said when did i support that? when we were having the fight over planned parenthood, donald responded by repeating on the stage in a republican primary that he thinks planned parenthood does wonderful things. i would ask each of you in the media who has reported on many once ins, have you ever a republican presidential campaign seen a republican praising for president

planned parenthood on a national debate stage? mind you, he had just called me a liar for saying that was his record. and marco rubio does the same thing. behaving like p donald trump with a smile. at the debate. i made three points about marco's record on immigration. one, that marco right now currently sports granting citizenship to the 12 million people here illegally. it is a fact he said just a couple of debates ago on the debate stage that he currently supporting it and acknowledged this may not be the majority view of my party. but i, marco rubio support it. "meet the press" with chuck todd and said he would grant citizenship to minal l aliens with cri convictions.

the first point i made about immigration that marco currently supports granting citizenship to the people here illegally is a fact. it is his own record, his own words. the second observation i made about him is that in florida he supported granting in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. that, likewise, is a fact. there's no gray area, no interpretation, it is a legislative fact. is the third point i made that marco went on univision in spanish and said that on his irst day in office, he would not rescind president obama's illegal executive amnesty. fact.that, too, is a look, univision, you can go watch the video. he said this on national television. it is this bizarre notion that on national

television somehow don't exist. and marco's response was exactly the same as donald's. it was to yell liar, liar, liar. and indeed, to respond with the quip, how would ted know what i said on univision? he doesn't even speak spanish. well, that was another false statement from marco. although, i'll readily admit my spanish is not great. but that's also a debater's trick. notice, he didn't answer the substance of anything i said. because the facts were all true and accurate. and instead, both marco and donald, their strategy is simply to yell liar, liar, liar. but i will say it has been even more unfortunate. both donald and marco have got a further step, in addition to elling liar whenever anybody points to their actual record makes true statements about , the policy positions second strategy that both donald is marco have relied upon

utter fabrications. esterday, donald trump re-tweeted his own social media that or who claimed had said i coburn was dishonest. now, i understand this amplified the attack that donald's making. screaming liar, liar, to anytime anyone points donald's record. so it was great for him to be able to point to someone else saying the same thing. there's just one minor detail. the quote was a complete fake. within a few hours, tom coburn went on the record and said that a, quote, utter fabrication. in response to that, donald deleted his tweet. his social media director

deleted his tweet. few hours azingly, a later, donald went on a national tv broadcast and repeated the fabrication. after he had deleted the tweet, it was an oburn said utter fabrication, donald happily sat on national tv that are simply basis and at had no truth that are complete fabrications. a new level for presidential politics. and i would note the rubio campaign is doing the same thing. they are right now in the closing period of the campaign. not focused on any policy agenda. not focused on substantive differentiation between his record and my record. not focused on any accomplishments that mr. rubio has.

but, instead, devoting all of their energy to number one screaming liar and number two, focusing on two fabrications. number one, this fake facebook up that was allegedly put retracting the endorsement. now, the facebook post is a fake. we didn't design it. we had nothing to do with it. and yet, the rubio campaign over and over and over, again, is claiming that we did. with zero evidence. false alsely attributing misconduct to us with no basis whatsoever other than it fits the narrative they would like to drive. secondly, the rubio ampaign is talking about the supposed push polls that have been going out. i have no idea if there

have been push polls, or not. but our campaign has had nothing to do with them. we have said that multiple times. now, what is a push poll? a push poll is a poll that is not conducted to measure public opinion. conducted to determine where the candidates, which messages re resinating, which ones are not. that's a typical poll that every campaign is doing. a push poll is something different, something that goes out very, very widely and is designed just to push negative essages to reach lots of voters. it's a means of voter communication. polls are pushing information that is nasty and often false. now, i don't know whether there polls, or not, in this campaign, but i know our campaign had nothing to do with it. and yet, marco, his campaign 500,000 robo calls. campaign surrogate

of his accusing our campaign of being behind the push polls. now, he was asked today what evidence he had for that. he had no evidence. he has no basis whatsoever. he simply, his campaign, look, it's unfortunate. has not gotten the traction he wanted. i recognize that the rubio campaign is disappointed with a third place finish in iowa, a fifth-place finish in new hampshire. and the consultants running his campaign have apparently made that their one hope of doing well is to make false attacks with no basis whatsoever. i will note, the one person we poll is done a push senator marco rubio. robo you sent 500,000 calls, you're not trying to measure public opinion, you're negative drive a

message. and what was the push poll the campaign was pushing? that the cruz campaign was unethically driving these push polls. they have no basis for it. this is an entirely made up fabrication, just like the tom coburn quote that donald trump used. nd let's be clear, how do we know it's marco rubio? well, because the robo call ends with, this was paid for by marco president. that's actually how someone responsible points to evidence. how do i know? because it's from their campaign directly. ethics matter. and you have donald trump putting io repeatedly forth fabrications with no vidence, no basis whatsoever, just trying to throw mud and attack. want to candidates

tell the voters, listen, everyone's dirty, everyone's unethical. but that's not true. and their strategy of screaming liar whenever anybody points to on r record and relying is not indicative of candidates running honest campaigns. and with that, i'm happy to answer questions. defending ou're yourself, obviously. but for a while you told us, do this is you stooping to their level? this m the beginning of campaign, we've taken the high road. many of y'all have been on the now for nearly a year. you've seen attack after attack, personal ttack after attack. and i don't respond in kind. and i'm not going to. i'm not insulting anybody here. i'm responding with simple facts. me a legal s sent

cease and desist letter saying stop telling the voters my record. objectively legally frivolous. i will make that point. i'll point to policy and substance in record. that should be the bread and butter of politics. but the insults and the falsehoods and the fabrications have no business in politics. it is incumbent on all of us to speak the truth. i can change and impact what i do. and we are going to continue to focus on substance and issues. the record of donald trump and marco rubio and the other candidates. >> yesterday, the president singled out donald trump and many ially said in not so words that he wasn't serious enough to be president of the united states. is not eality tv show the presidency. do you agree with the president on that?

>> i think a great many south are concerned that prepared to is not be commander in chief. hat he doesn't have the basic knowledge, understanding, to keep and temperament this country safe. and as we've seen the rise of terrorism, that has become the most important determination the voters are making. i think when donald trump at one of the prior debates, evidence he did not know what the nuclear triad was. that is a real problem for someone who wants to be commander in chief to have no basic tools that defend ourselves from nuclear aggression. likewise, i think justice weekend passing this elevated the stakes of this election. that the people of south asking the very

simple question, who do i trust? principal constitutionalists supreme court justices. there's a reason donald trump is attacking this ad. because nobody looking at donald trump's record could believe for donald would appoint conservative justices. i'll tell you why i know that. ecause if you look over the past decades, anytime a epublican nominates a judge with a proven conservative record on the bench, you have a nasty, knockdown, dragout battle. the democrats care about the court, they will invest all their energy. it's why over and over again epublican presidents have decided the court didn't matter to them that much so they go to a stealth candidate with no record. because they're not willing to invest the political capital.